McElroy cited the commission’s failure to address two glaring problems in higher education—the academic staffing crisis and the decline in funding by the states. By avoiding these issues, the commission virtually ignored the two most important reasons for today’s troubles in higher education.

“The commission should have strongly condemned the decline in recent years in state support for higher education institutions,” McElroy says. “The impact of this decline in funding has been compounded by the federal government cutting $12 billion from the federal student aid program in the most recent budget.”

Controversial from the start
The secretary’s commission stirred controversy and concern from the beginning. Although the president of the American Council on Education (ACE) and a number of academic researchers were on the panel, its composition was weighted toward business representatives, some of them advocates for for-profit education.

“If the commission had included at least one representative from a faculty organization, an issue like the staffing crisis would not have been ignored,” McElroy notes.

Further concerns arose when a number of commissioners indicated that the report might call for a national standardized test in higher education, a national graduation rate, other accountability measures along the lines of No Child Left Behind and national accreditation, and cost controls, among other bad ideas.

As the process went forward, the AFT’s higher education division attended most commission hearings, met with commission members and sent communications to express the AFT’s concerns.

The AFT recognizes that there are real problems facing higher education—especially the severe cutbacks in funding for public colleges and universities; the loss of good, full-time tenured faculty jobs; and the overuse and exploitation of contingent faculty. It welcomes a national dialogue on how to address them.

The AFT has been at the forefront of advocates for change. For example, the union has fought to expand the Pell Grant program and has opposed loan program changes that make borrowing more expensive for families. Moreover, the AFT endorses joint programs with high schools to improve the preparation of students for college, but opposes an overlay of No Child Left Behind measures on higher education. AFT faculty are grappling with student persistence problems and have recommended strengthened financial and academic support systems as an important part of the solution.

But regarding the commission’s agenda to explore standardized testing, the AFT is strongly opposed. Faculty leaders do not believe that a broad test will tell more than the judgments and evaluations of professional educators. Moreover, educators cringe at the effect on teaching and learning of course curricula being hijacked by a testing agenda.

When the final report was released, ACE president David Ward would not sign it, objecting to its one-size-fits-all generalizations that would not apply to the varied institutions and missions in higher education.

Among the commission’s recommendations:

■  Increasing college participation through better K-12 cooperation with the higher ed world.

■  Increasing affordability by expecting colleges to cut costs and improve productivity through better avenues for two-year college transfer, better use of technology, greater recognition of college courses offered at the high school level, and lifting productivity-hindering regulations.

■  Streamlining financial aid programs to simplify applications, increase need-based aid, and facilitate private loans for middle- and upper-income families.

■  Increasing accountability by having colleges collect and make transparent their data on cost, price and student success.

In an analysis of the report, which the AFT has sent to every local leader, the union warns that the report’s focus on shortcomings in student achievement will undoubtedly be cited by opponents of public funding as an argument to impose stringent controls over colleges and universities. The AFT also expects the report to be cited by advocates of for-profit institutions and online distance learning programs. The union will support the development of new pedagogies and curricula, but will oppose a wholesale embrace of electronic education as the solution to every problem in student learning. As it has stated in the past, the AFT supports accountability in higher education and will be sure to demand accountability in how for-profit institutions are monitored.

Changes are already afoot
The Department of Education has already assumed an active posture in carrying out the commission’s recommendations. In an unexpected move, Spellings announced that some of the recommendations would be carried out through negotiated rule-making—a process whereby the government works with affected parties to establish regulations. The process will begin with four regional public hearings and then move into actual rule-making. At the top of the list for discussion are the recommendations dealing with financial aid.

That said, there are many actors still to be heard from on the policy front, and Congress ultimately will have the final say over changes in the federal student-aid system.

The AFT will remain closely involved in the issues raised by the commission, advocating for quality education and professional control over teaching, learning and research; for programs that concentrate government resources on financial aid for the neediest students; and for support services to help such students persevere in their studies.

To see the full analysis of the Spellings Commission report, go to www.aft.org/higher_ed/pubs-reports.

CONGRESS SAYS NO TO TAX BREAKS—YOURS
It’s been called the Congress that just couldn’t say no to tax cuts. For the record, however, the GOP-controlled Congress did manage in the final days of the last session to turn its back on one tax-cut package—yours.

Politicians bolted for the campaign trail this fall without extending a modest $250 tax credit that educators receive for the classroom supplies they buy with their own money. Congress also failed to extend a tax deduction of up to $4,000 for college tuition that millions of families rely on.

The willingness of GOP congressional leaders to skip town for the October recess without addressing these concerns infuriated Democrats, who blasted the Republican leadership at a news conference in late September.

“When the average family sits around the kitchen table and asks what has Congress done this year, they probably can’t come up with an answer,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

“When it comes to protecting the middle class, the greatest affront of all is the Republicans allowing the college-tuition tax deduction to expire,” Schumer said. “It’s the most clear-cut case of Republicans putting the cares of a few wealthy Americans over the needs of millions of middle class [Americans] who are being crushed by the rising cost of college.”

The House also passed an extension of the Higher Education Act—its third—which throws in some extra bonuses for the federal guarantee agencies. H.R. 6138 increases the amount of profit they are guaranteed when they purchase and process loans.  President Bush signed this bill into law.

DEMOCRATS CALL FOR A NEW DIRECTION
A month before the election, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave a major address at Georgetown University Law School and outlined her party’s agenda, called “A New Direction for America.” Upbraiding the party in power for its $12 billion raid on student aid programs, she pledged that Democrats would increase Pell Grants by 25 percent—to a maximum of $5,100—and would cut the interest rates on student loans by 50 percent.